Eebatcri anti 13rarraittud iii pgIumunt.

I. REPEAL. OF 'ME UNION.

The adjourned debate on this question was resumed on Monday. 31r. 1). CALLAGHAN, Mr. FINN, O'CONNOR DON, Mr. D. RONAYNE, and Dr. BALDwIN, supported Mr. O'CoNeleees motion : Sergeant PERRIN, Sir R. BATESON, Mr. Lenox-, Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSsON, Sir H. VIVIAN, and Colonel TORRENS, spoke against it. The speeches generally were not remarkable for eloquence or for throwing new light on the subject, and furnish very little matter fur extract. In allusion to the assertions of the Repealers that the Union was carried in oppo- sition to the wishes of the Irish nation, Sergeant PERRIN said— The question had been argued upon the other side as if the Union of the two kingdoms depended solely on an act of the Legislature, the people not being parties to it. Now nothing could be more unfair than such a representation ; because it was perfectly well known, that at the period of the Union the great mass of the Catholic population approved of that measure, and that at the pre- sent day the Protestants of Ireland were to a man in its favour. It was too late now to deny the legality of the compact entered into at the Union. Mr. O'Connell had virtually admitted its legality, when he appeared at the bar of that House, and claimed to be admitted to take his seat as Representative of Clare after the passing of the Citholic Relief Bill in 1829 ; but he admitted it in express terms in the address which he delivered upon that occasion, wherein ire sand—" I claim to sit and vote by virtue of the act of Union with Ireland. If I stood upon the act of Union alone, I should stand upon firm ground, in an as- sembly of Christians and gentlemen." After that, bow was it possible to con- tend that he as well aihis constituents had nut recognized and sanctioned the act of Union.

With respect to the real effect of the Union upon Irish prosperity, be had doubts.

It was undeniable that trade had fallen off in the city of Dublin, and that a Frticular class of merchants had ceased to exist there; but this was ascribable, sot to the iluion, but to the change introduced into mercantile transactions by the application of steam-power to the purposes of navigation. Formerly there srere large fatties is Lublin, who, in the autumn, imported large quantities of Members bad been guilty, in quoting tine speeches of Earl Grey, Mr. goods, which were placed in store and distributed over different parts of the country as the demand for them arose; but now, in consequence of the rapid communication by means of steam, goods were imported into various parts of Ireland direct from Liverpool and Bristol. With respect to the linen trade, more of that article was now manufactured in Ireland than at any former period. Ile would not undertake to say whether the Union had produced a had or a good effect upon the trade of Ireland ; but the effect, whatever it was, had not yet been ascertained. The Union had not had a fair trial : it was not, in fact, completed till 1829 ; and what had occurred in the intermediate period could not affect the question. He was willing to give due credit to Sir Robert Peel and the Administration with which he was connected, for passing the bill of 1829; but to the too long delay and tardy concession of that measure were to he ascribed the discontented and unhappy condition of the peasantry, and the manner in which they had been arrayed against the laws, and in which the laws had been enforced against them.

Mr. lioNevee read some passages from a letter written by the Marquis of Anglesea to the British Cabinet in lees, in which he en. Forced the necessity of passing measures of efficient relief for Ireland ; and complained, that while the people called out for remedial measures, " he was unable to answer them save by the Riot Act and the point of the bayonet."

Colonel ToaarNs spoke very briefly, and was very indistinctly heard. He made some remarks respecting absenteeism.

If absenteeism was an evil, he (lid not believe that its remedy would be found in the repeal of the Legislative Union ; by which the dismemberment of the empire would be effocterl, and the result would be most injurious to both coun- tries. It should not be forgotten, that there were two dasiei of absentees—the absentee proprietors, and the absentee labourers. Aluch had been said on the subject of the Irish rents being remitted to this country in the shape of provi- sions; but it should not be forgotten that much of these provisions were eon- sullied by the absentee labourer to whom he had alluded.

Sir II. View: admitted the poverty of the Irish people.

He had himself passed through the hovels of the people, and lie was free to admit that there was no people on the face of the earth who were SO Avretchedly poor ; but that was not to be attributed to the Union. In connexion with thus sobject, Mr. Fergus O'Connor had spoken of emigration ; and had asked why 90,000 persons should annually emigrate from Ireland, while only 40,000 left England for that purpose, and but 20,000 from Scotland ? lie dial see why, while a single acre was left uncultivated in Ireland ; but perhaps the fact might lie explained by stating, that while agitation prevailed emigration must increase. No man who could help it would stay in such a country. 'He was not an advo- cate for suppressing discussion on the subject ; but he really thought that after this question was decided, the penalty of a pramunire on goods and chattels should attach to the man who proposed a repeal of the Union.

The debate was again adjourned on Monday ; and was finally, after another long sitting, brought to a close on Tuesday. Mr. Meeenes, Mr. Meunier: O'CoNeeer, Mr. LALOR, Mr. E. BUTIIVEN, Mr. WALKER, Mr. 5V. OCIIE, and Mr. C. O'DWYER, made speeches in favour of Repeal ; but their contents were for the most part merely repeti- tions of the arguments and assertions previously advanced. Mr. JEPII- SON, Mr. PETER, Mr. CHRISTMAS, Colonel VERNER, Mr. SHAw, Mr. JAMES, and Mr. O'REILLY, supported the amendment.

Mr. Ilene objected both to the original motion and the nmendment. The motion was to inquire into the means by which the Union with Ireland had been effected. He might repudiate the means, but the Union had been effected, and he did trot see that any good could be got from such an inquiry. It might be an object of inquiry whether Ire- land was fairly represented in the House of Commons • but beyond that, or beyond an inquiry into her grievances, be would not go ; for neither in nor out of the House would he lead himself to a repeal of the Legislative Union between the two countries. lie gave Mr. O'Connell credit for agitating the question of repeal solely with the view to obtaining good government for his country. The real question was, what was the object of the Union ? And here it wins plain that that object bad not been attained ; for anarchy and disorder reigned in Irelund. lie considered that it must be inferred from the amendment, that every thing had been done for Ireland which circumstances had permitted. '1 hough this might be denied in speeches from the Trea- sury bench, he would contend that it was the true and real meaning of the amendment. But the reason of the extraordinary ascendancy of Mr. O'Connell was to be found in the misgovernment of Ireland. The Reform Bill, even, had been made the means of doing injustice to Ireland. Mr. Hume then read some extracts from the letter of theMar- quis of Anglesea, addressed in October 1832 to Earl Grey, hr which the question of a thorough reform of the Irish Church was mentioned as one of immediate pressure. Any Government, the Marquis said, pledged to mailea'n that establishment in its existing state, must be brought into cot sta it and permanent collision with public opinion, and with the passion; and prejudices of the Irish people. Mr. Hume thought that Government had acted upon a mistaken principle, and had dragged, along with them a Liberal and too confiding a House of Com- mons. He quoted some passages from a speech delivered in 1823 by Sir Henry. Parnell, from which it appeared, that out of the period of the last thirty-one years, no fewer than twenty-six years had been years of actual insurrection; during which martial law or the Insurrection Act had been in force. The system, therefore, Sir Henry contended, upon which the British Government had acted towards Ireland, had com- pletely failed. Mr. Hume, after reiterating his conviction that the agitation and distress of Ireland was owing to misgovernment, not to Mr. O'Connell, concluded by reading the following amendment, which he promised to move when the proper time arrived.

" That tine present state of Ireland is afflicting to its inhabitants and dangerous to the well-being or the United Kingdom ; and although some salutary laws affecting the Irish people have been passed by the Imperial Parliament, yet we deeply regret that the beneficial results!antimpatcd from the Legislative Union have not been realized. The failure may. however, be attributed to the error of Parliament in refusing or delayiug the redress of substantial grievances, and not applying more extensively those remedial measures, chiefly as regards the Established Church of Ireland, which a 'them/ and benignant policy would dictate. That we will now direct our best and earliest atter'• tion to the removal of all existing causes of just complaint, and to the application of such measures of improvement and reform, both iu Church and State, as, by doing justice, a ill best promote the peace and contentment of the people of Ireland. and by tints securing them the full benefit of the British Constitution, increase their attacie intent to its principles, and give additional strength and prosperity to the empire." Lord A LTIIORP considered it a part of his duty to state the grounds on which he opposed the motion of Mr. O'Connell, though he had no- thing to add to the unanswered arguments of Mr. Spring Rice and Sir Robert Peel. He complained of the unfairness of which the Repeal Spring Rice, and others, delivered under far different circumstances. With regard to the extracts which had been read from a letter purporting to be one from the Marquis of Anglesea to Earl Grey, Lord Grey had assured him that he had no recollection of having received any such letter. [Mr. RoNasaee here explained that it was not a titivate letter, but a memorial addressed to Earl Grey, dated Phoenix Park, October 183.2.] Lord Althorp said he had supposed it was a private letter. 1,t was a strange argument to prove the distress of Ireland, to affirm that the Irish exported both corn anti cattle : he could say that the indivi- dual farmer would be badly off who did not sell both. Undoubtedly it would be well if the Irish had the means of consuming their produce at home ; but, if not, it was beneficial for them to export it. The ques- tion before the House had been so amply discussed, that be would not delay its final decision by any long speech but he would say one word in explanation of the amendment, which speech; been assumed to declare that every thing which ought to be, in justice, had been done for Ireland.

If that had been the meaning of the amendment, he for one should not vote fort; ; hut he believed it would be found to he susceptible of a ver:• different hi- terpretation. As he understood the amendment, it declared that the Imperial Parliament had paid great attention to the affairs of Ireland, and that it was ready to do all that was needful for the benefit of that country. That Parlia- ment had bestowed great attention on the affairs of Ireland, he theught no man would deny ; and he for one rejoiced in the fact, and considered the exemplary patience with which the llouse had listened to the whole of the present discus- sion to be most gratifying, as affording auot)ler proof of the anxiety which it felt to discuss fully any matter relating to Ireland.

Mr. O'CONNELL, who had been repeatedly called upon, but who had given way to other Members, at length rose to reply. He commenced by declaring, that it was his intention, in compliance with the evident wish of the House, to be us brief as possible. The debate had been eminently useful. He admitted that the demand for Repeal was made by a portion only of the Irish people : there was no disguising that, after what had passed in the House. But Ministers must also perceive that they did not possess the affections of the majority of the Irish. He had hoped that, in the course of the discussion, they would have opened some of their views for the amelioration of Ireland : but the silence of Ministers on this topic showed how fruitless it was to expect ameliora- tion from them. He remarked upon the numerous personal attacks which, notwithstanding the scrupulousness with which he had avoided personalities, had been aimed at him.

The first individual who assailed him was the honourable Member for Belfast. Now, was there ever any thing so indiscreet done by any Government, in select- ing that honourable Member as the seconder of their amendment? If he had de- sired to lessen the authority due to the pmpositions of Government—if he had desired not to give to their arguments the full weight which reasoning deserved —he would have suggested to the honourable Secretary of the Treasury to take as his friend a fiery, furious partisan, to pronounce invectives against the religion of the majority of Irishmen, and to taunt their Representatives—men at least as good as himself—with being mere political adventurers. Was the Government aware that Mr. Tenneat had, in a violently Conservative speech, denounced the Corporation Commission as au inquisition, and had assailed one of the Commis- sioners with as little candour as veracity ? There was no man who had pro- mulgated such Republican principles as Mr. 'ferment, on the Reform Bill, on a pampered Prelacy, and on the dangers of an hereditary insolent Aristocracy ; and yet this was the man who was selected by the Government to be the seconder of their amendment—this was the man who was welcomed with enthusiastic cheers in assailing him. He would not retaliate; but he could well conceive frantic Republicanism dwindling into mean, obsequious, and subservient dandyism. (Cheers from the Depealers.) Ile could conceive it foolish and frantic in the rst instance; servile, sycophantic, and frivolous in the second ; and calumnious and contemptible iu both. ( Cheers from the saute quarter.)

He denied having made the speech at Kildare which had been attri- buted to him, but riot reported ; for there was no reporter present at its delivery. All that he bad really said was, that "five or six persons might go up some fine morning to their Representatives," to use an Irish phrase, " with short sticks, and should return the same night."

Mr. O'Connell denied, in strong terms, that his acts or his speeches tended to produce the separation of the two countries. The arguments of the Ministers and their supporters would be well weighed by a shrewd and intelligent people.

If they had the best of it, they would have a legitimate triumph ; but let not Mi- nisters expect to obtain it from their majority, however great it might be, or from tic applause, however marked, which followed the speeches made on their side of the question. There was nothing to authorize the Parliament of Ireland to dis- pese of the Irish nation to the British Parliameut, any more than there was any thing to authorize the British Parliament to dispose of the British nation to any other on the face of the globe.

Strenuous attempts had been made to prove that the Union had been the forerunner of Irish prosperity—that Ireland had benefited by the Union. But the existence of real distress did away with the effect of arithmetical calculation upon all who were really acquainted with Ire- land.

The Member for Paisley (Sir Daniel Sandford) had flailed his maiden sword in an attack on the Repeaters, in which it was but fair to admit he had displayed equal talent and courtesy ; although unfortunately blaming personality in the outset, he had himself fallen into personality previous to the conclusion of his :resell. He thanked him, however, for one admission : he said, " What signify calculations:when opposed to appalling facts?" A Daniel come to judgment ! (Laughter.) Exactly so. What signified arithmetical calculations when op- posed to facts? and what facts had the House heard stated upon the subject ?

Mr. Spring Rice, whose speech was made up of tables and returns, well knew how such documents were got up.

He was aware that, no oath being now required as to the cargo of vessels, the statements of what they contained were generally as fanciful as any thing in a romance—statements made to satisfy the revenue-officers as soon as possible, and which had no relation to the actual cargo. But passing by this fact—which showed, however, that his tables were not to be relied on—Mr. Rice admitted that up to le12:5 Parliament did nothing legislatively for Ireland. Notwith- standing this, however, he talked a great deal of increasing prosperity; and spoke of the orient morning commencing in 1S0% and increasing in warmth and enlightenment till the present moment. How would his poetry appear—for such was his description—when it met the eyes of Irishmen in their darkness and misery, who would read it as an insult upon their distress?

A great deal had been said about the prosperity of Ireland, especially of Limerick and other towns ; but was even Limerick prosperous ?

He had spoken of new streets and squares; and true it was there was a new Square in Limerick, of which, however, the only tenant was a statue of the ho- Aourable gentleman (Laughter); not a single house in Rice Square was occupied. Mr. Spring Rice was Its only inhabitant. ( Itentwed laughter.) Nu doubt a man might make a handsome fortune by exhibitiug this statue ; the showinau holding the honourable gentleman's speech in his hand and crying " Walk in and see the wonderful West Briton in Rice Square. (Laughter. )

The way to disarm the agitators, was by doing justice to Ireland, not by paltry prosecutions of the press. There was, as Mr. Sergeant l'errin bad himself acknowledged, a want of fair and impartial adminis- tration of justice in Ireland. While this was wanting, it would not be in the power of the congregated phobias opposite to put an end to agi- tation. With respect, however, to the present discussion, nothing could be better tempered.

He did not knew whether he had succeeded in effecting anv change in the sentiments of the House toweide hint, but certainly the house had acted so as to alter his feelings towards it. The manner of the discussion and the topics raised in the course of it could telly /10 good. If the argument of Iris opponents were sound and good, it would bs duly weighed and appreciated by his fellow countrymen, a shrewd and intelligent race ; but the extraordinary and over- whelming majority which might be arrayed against the motion would weigh quite the other way, and produce a feeling of irritation instead of carrying con- viction along with it.

He had himself been unsparingly censured, because, having given twenty-five years to the cause of his country, he was now paid by his countrymen for his services.

He gloried in that censure, and was prouder of that salary from his country than he could be of the greatest gift which the highest monareli in the world could bestow. He would trot, and did not, do any act which be considered de- rogatory to him, and was not to be frightened or shamed by what might be said on the subject. The autocrat, Nicholas, forsooth, would honour the man on whonthe conferred his bounty ; but the people of Ireland, lie supposed, must he taken to degrade the nem on whom they bestowed theirs !

Mr. O'Connell concluded by calling upon Ministers to follow up their victory by measures of justice and conciliation towards It eland.

The House then divided for Mr. O'Connell's motion, 39; fur Mr. Spring Rice's amendment, 523; majority, 483.

Mr. Home then moved the amendment which he had before given notice of.

Lord ALT1IORP opposed it ; derryiegsin the most distinct terms, that the address, as proposed by Mr. Hire, was intended to convey the idea of general approbation of the past conduct of Parliament towards Ireland.

After some few remarks from several Members, Mr. Hume with- drew his amendment, and Mr. .Mussoss then moved the following.

That it is the opinion of this House that au address to his Majesty, having for its oltieet the suppression of any question consistent is itiih the principles of the free Consti- tution Utile British empire, without a previA,Ili inquiry into and report tipm its merits by a Committee of this lloase, would furt0:11 a pee...dont highly prejudicial to the in- terests of any portion of Iris NIajost s's solwieets se .king for redress of grievances, and at variance with those principles which this 'louse, its representing the great body of the People, is called upon to support."

This was opposed by Lord ALTHORP, and withdrawn.

The address was then agreed to, and ordered to be communicated to the Lords for their concurrence.

On Wednesday, Mr. Spring Rice and several other Members from the Commons desired a conference with the Peers ; and the Marquis of Lansdowne, Earl Grey, the Duke of Wellington, and others, pro- ceeded to the Painted Chamber. Soon afterwards, the Peers returned, and the Marquis of Lassnows:e stated, that they had received a copy of the address to the King voted by the House of Commons, to which the concurrence of their Lordships was desired. The address was then read, and laid on the table. Lord TEYNIIAM presented eighty petitions for a Repeal of the Union, together with sixty-nine for the abolition of Tithes. Afrer several other petitions had been presented, Earl GREY rose to move that the birds should immediately concur in the address. The course he recommended was not unusual on mat- ters of great importance ; and what case of more urgent importance could exist than one involving the consideration of the Repeal of the Union with Ireland—a question affecting the peace, safety, and in- tegrity of the empire ? The severance of the Legislative Union, must atlect not only the; Government, but the people of both countries, and dissolve all the tics that connected therm Suppose the disunion ef- fected, what would be the consequence ?

It would be to expose both kingdoms, thus weakened, to tho attacks of foreign ene- mies; it would be to introduce inieroa:lc :t stir of things that must lead to the ruia and misery of both countries, but ult:eli tv,a;I:l more especially he felt by that part of the I•nited Kingdom which it 1% :IS tOlIgilt in delude by specious declarations on this question. Ile could, if it were necessary. r into a very large field of argument and detail ou this most important subjeet ; but Iv, did not think that he was called on to express more than these general 11,7ri area chi h were perfectly in accordance with the address, and to which, as he had ato•aly said, lie anticipated their Lordships' anon', IOWA sanction.

With regard to the allusions made in the debate to the part which be had himself taken against the Act of Union. he said-

" I do not know. my Lords, that it is w.•etli while for me to enter on a charge made against me, as if I had done something nu.,t unjustifiable in supporting strenuously, as I do, considering the imputattee of the question, the Legislative Union, because I was one who at the time it was originally proposed, did my best to oppose it. I did so, and I did it conscientiously. I oppo:cd it at a time when i was almost alone, during a time when Mr. Fox did not attend; and I admit that the opposition I gave to the measure was as great as my feeble powers would permit. But does it follow, my Lords, as a consequence. that after this Union has exi-ted for above thirty year.;—after this link between the two countries has been cemented by time—after it has become a part of our system—after circumstances have so altered, that whatever it might have been in its origin, the severance mow would be a nio,t calamitous event to both annitries—does it follow, I say, as a colLettnence—is it incumbent on me by any principle of consis- tency or dusty to refuse top event that being undone aide' perhaps ought not to have beet; ilium, but which having been done, cannot be undone without being followed by the most alartniu4consequeuces: There is a maxitn, "ficri sed 'Mum told ; and I might shelter myself ender that maxim, and say, that though I saw objections to it in its origin, 1 see greater evils in row destroying it, and therefore I resist its &striae- thin. Though looking back to the lilac and the circumstances, I am not sttre that I should not, ii plic,s1 in them again, do the same thing as before; yet, looking also at altar has passed since, and seeing the advantages which the Union has produced, I am prepared to say that I was then mis;aken. (t4arrs.) I do not think it is any part of It manly consistency to maintain an opinion N hen you have had reason to sec that it was wrong, and I trust, therefore, that whatever imputations may he thrown on me, 'whenever I 61`1, V.:1,111 to eliange an opinion, I shall not fail candidly to avow it. I have vindicated the came coarse Mothers, and I and prepared to adopt d myself." (Coa- fisued thecrs.)

After alluding to the vast majority by which the address had been carried in the Commons, comprising a large majority even of the Irish Members, he concluded by moving that the House should concur in the address ; and for that purpose, fill up the blank at the commencement of it with the words " Lords Spiritual and Temporal."

Lord BROUGHAM seconded the motion. He expressed his hearty approbation and delight at the result of the long and elaborate debate in the House of Commons. He felt convinced, that if any thing could king the deluded Irish Repealers to a due sense of their folly, if any thing could open their eyes, and show them that they were the dupes of designing men, who misled them for the sordid purposes of gain, if any thing could wean them from their present thraldom, it was the lesson just read to them by their Representatives in the free Parliament of the United Kingdom. Among the 520 odd Members of the Parliament of England, Scotland, and Wales, only one had been found to vote for Repeal yes, there was one English Member ; but the exception in his case was one which proved the rule. It could not be that the whole nation was wrong. Ireland was rapidly improving in despite of the unnatural attempts to depress it.

Was it not lamentable that the country was not allowed to run that race for which Nature had made her capable? And, great God ! why was it so? It was not that there existed grievances; it was not that the people complained ; it was not that blots existed in the laws—with the exception of one or two insignificant ones, which he hoped, with the assistance of their Lordships, would speedily be razed and obliterated from their books ; it was nut for any of these causes; but it was because their existed certain 11111iVilltlalAa who were gifted by that same nature with great talents—who had improved those talents by assiduity and perseverance—who were possessed of large acquirements, and gifted with the vapacity of raising themselves to wealth by honesty and to power by innocent ambition ; it was all because those misguided men —as much mistaking their happiness as their honour, and at war with-their own interests, us well as with the interests of their fellow subjects- preferred to honest industry. and its creditable and honourable gains, a life of agitation—a life of agitation, supported by a species of personal as well as political mendicancy—( Loud e/wers)—a state which, even to the untie-innate victims of such practices, ir their natural and !Honourable feel- ings were not perverted, must be attended with unbearable shame. There had been geniuses of other times reduced to beggary. One had recorded his own disgrace in his own immortal verses. Ile was the SP11.1110 of modern poets, perhaps the third poet of all ages. When reduced to wiverty, not by his own idleness or extravagance, but by the political contests of his country, awl by persecution, over which he had no control, he begged his bread during a season. But, far from glorying in his beggary, he has recorded that the sense of shame under which he received the alms of his fellow coon- trymen was such, that the mere sensation made every fibre in his system quiver w ith shame. lie trusted that few were gilled with such geniuses that they could long suffer the 811:M'% or brook the indignity of living by such means as these, or who, in order to perpet..ate such unmanly support, could coutinue to plunge their country in distress and ruin.

The Duke of WELLINGTON, the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, and the Marquis of WEsrmEtern, expressed their hearty concurrence in the address ; which was agreed to unanimously. Another conference was desired with the Commons in the Painted Chamber ; at which the concurrence of their Lordships was signified ; the Lords with white staves were then ordered to wait upon the King, to know when it would be his Majesty's pleasure to receive the address ; and the Earl of SHAFTESBURY shortly afterwards informed the House, that his Majesty had named Thursday, at half-past one for that purpose.

The Peers reassembled on Thursday between twelve and one o'clock, for the purpose of carrying up the address to the King. A considerable number were present ; and the House having been adjourned during pleasure, Earl Grey, Lord Brougham, Lord Plunkett, the Earl of Mulgruve, and many others, proceeded with the address to the Palace. The House met again at five o'clock ; when the Lord Chancellor read the following answer to the address.

" it is with the greatest satisfaction that I have received this solemn and united ex- pression of the determination of both Houses of Parliament to maintain undulate the Legislative l,nion between Great Britain :ind Ireland; which I entirely agree with you in considering as essential to the preservation of the integrity and safety of the British Empire.

" Yon may rely, therefore, upon my discharging with fidelity and fearlessness the sacred duty which I owe to my subjects, in exercising those powers which are invested iu use for their protection against attempts which, if successful, must uecesszirily pro- duce:1 separation of my dominions.

"In thus expressing my concurrence in the determination which you have so justly stated, I look back with satisthet ion to those salutary laws which since the Union have been passed for the advantage of the interests el Ireland; and I shall at all times be most anxious to afford my best assistance in removing all just causes of complaint, and iu sanetioning all welbconsidered measures of improvement."

The King's answer was read to the House of Commons by the Speaker.

2. OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH.

A great number of petitions were presented on Wednesday, by Sir ANDREW AGNEW, Mr. A. JOIINSTDNE, Sir H. PARNELL, Mr. HOME, Mr. ROBERT WALLACE Lord ASHLEY, and other Members, for and against the Sabbath Observance Bill ; after which, Sir ANDREW AGNEW moved that the bill be read a second time. Sir OswAso MOSLEY seconded the motion. Mr. E. L. BeLWaa moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months. The original motion was supported by Mr. WILKS, Mr. PLUMTICE, Mr. GOULBURN, Mr. SING LAIR, Mr. A. JOHNSTONE, and Sir A. AGNEW. Mr. POTTER, Mr. POELTER, Mr. IL Mr. ROEBI:CE, Earl GaosvENOR, Mr. HALCOMB, Lord

GISBORNE, Colonel EvANs, Mr. MARK PHILLIPS, Mr. WYNN, Sir RONALD FERGUSON, Sir 1-l. W. RIDLEY, Lord SANDON, and Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSKr, spoke in favour of Mr. Bulwer's amendment ; which was curried, by 161 to 124. So the bill was thrown out, by a majority of X37; which was announced amidst loud cheers.

The bill was very frsbly defended. Sir ANDREW AGNEW himself was quite inaudible in the Gallery ; and the other Members who sup- ported the second reading expressed disapprobation of several parts of the measure ; but contended, that the vast number of petitions in favour of some amendment of the laws relating to the observance of the Sab- bath, should induce the House to go into Committee on the bill. It was also urged, that there were numerous classes who deserved protec- tion, but who were compelled to work at present, against their sense of religious duty, on the Lord's Day. There was scarcely any attempt made to defend what the opponents of the bill considered its most ob- jectionable clauses.

The speeches against the motion were generally spirited, interesting, and amusing. Mr. E. L. BuLwEn said, that so far from creating a mysterious revere nee for the Lord's Day, the bill would tend to bring it into disrepute.

He feared that Sir Andrew Agnew was a wolf in sheep's clothing—a philo- sopher in disguise, who aimed at endangering religion itself by showing to what gloomy and tyrannical purposes the name of religion might be applied. In the outset of the bill, he stated that the laws on the Sabbath had become practically insufficient. When did any laws become impracticable? Why, when they were not suited to the spirit of the people. If the laws on the Sabbath were a dead letter, it Was because they were already too severe. When on other branches eif legislationsuch, for instance, as the criminal code—the law lost its vigour,

how did they restore it ? Did they make it more severe? No ! they made it more gentle. But Sir Andrew Agnew, in his wisdom, would revive a law by making it more opposed to the genius of the times ; and by rendering it doubly severe, he would render it doubly inefficient. Ile said in his first clause, that the comforts and conscientious scruples of one class were not to be sacrificed to the supposed comfort and advantage of another : yet all the rest of the bill was ingeniously framed to contradict the assertion with which he commenced at the onset. For, by and by, he asserted, that no part of the gloomy blessings of his bill extended to mental servants in the employment of their masters. Here, then, according to his creed, was an exclusive class especially marked out for perdition. The comfort of no class was to be sacrificed to the supposed ad- vantage of another : yet here the more numerous class (the servants) was sacri- ficed to the less numerous class (the masters). Again, who were to apprehend the naughty persons attending a newsroom, or sauntering into a tea. garden ? The Policemen, he supposed. Here then was another class marked out for per- dition. Why were the comforts, the conscientious scruples of the Pulicenten to be sacrificed to the supposed comfort and advantage of those zealous and sancti- fied persons Sir Andrew so ably represented, who

"Compound for sins they are inclined to,

By damning those they have no mind to ?"

Unhappy servants ! unfortunate Policemen! Why were their souls hi dear than the souls of the journeymen bakers and the souls of the jowl:J(7mm fish- mongers? What authority bad Sir Andrew for the harlequinade that would convert the Christian Sunday into the Jewish Sabbath ? Not in the Scriptures ; not in the Fathers, for Tertullian represents the Chris- tians of his time as indulging on that day in mirth and festivity.

And the reason why this day was thus cheerfully spent, and why it was or- dained, another of the Fathers, Justin, who wrote one hundred and fifty sears after Christ, expressly declares. Ile says expressly, that so far from having any connexion with the Jewish Sabbath, the Christians met on a Sunday, because it was the first day, in which God made the world, and also 1111 this day. Christ rose from the dead. And the moment we thus discover the origin of the Lord's Day,—the moment we separate it from the Sabbath of the Jews, and iwreeive that it was dedicated to the joyous recollection of the creation of the world, and the resurrection from the dead,—it is easy to see why it wits kept, not as a fast, but a festival, and hallowed not by sadness, but by joy.

What said the early ecclesiastical decrees?

In 057, one Council anathematized those who passed the Sunday in bodily- mortification and fasting. In 364, the Council of Laodicea condemned the practice of abstaining from secular employments on Sunday, as Judaizing. In the edict of Constantine, which first established the festival of the Sabbath by law, it is never held out as enjoined by Scripture, but as being merely of civil expediency; and all persons engaged in agriculture are invited to continue their affairs on that day. Clear proofs these that the early Christians never con- founded the first day of the week with that Judaic Sabbath which they deemed abrogated with the rest of the Jewish dispensation. If he cannot support his doctrine by the Scriptures or by the Fathers, can the honourable Itarolist sup- port it by the early doctrines of our own Church? On the contrary, the act of the pious Edward the Sixth (1547) says, that if men, from any scrupulosity or grudge of conscience, superstitiously abstain from working en the holyilays, they will grievously displease God. So in 1552 it is declared, that any hus- bandman, labourer, &c. may work any kind of work at his free will and plea- sure. He thought these latter authorities went too far : lie thought, in their anxiety not to confound the Christian Sunday with the Jewish Sabbath, they had encroached on the blessed principle of a day of rest. But yet be would rather rely ou even their authotity than that on which Sir A. Agnew relied.

Mr. R. PorrEa referred to the curtailment of the enjoyments of the industrious classes which the bill would effect.

" In large towns, and this great city in particular, numbers of young men are employed during the week-days in warehouses, shops, factories, and workshops,

many of which are iu the dense and ill-ventilated part of the town, and many- of then, are obliged to attend until late on Saturday evening ; many females are, during the week, closely confined in sewing ; domestic servants cau only get out

on the Sunday; but if this bill receives the sanction of Parliament, how severely will persons so situated suffer ! I know the hardships and privations yi ung men endure who, during the week, are closely, confined ; for, when a young mein, I

was for some years engaged in a shop, and afterwards in a warehouse, in the

towns of Birmingham and Manchester : my companions and I, from Monday morning until Saturday night, seldom or ever had opportunity, or liberty, to take

a walk ; and at this distance of time well do I remember the delight we felt at the return of Sunday, when we made little excursions on horseback, or in gigs, to the neighbouring villages, there rambling through Shenstoue's walks, I lagley Park, in the green lanes, or by the side of some brook. And this, too, was very frequently compatible with the observance of the Sabbath ; for we often attended a country church. But had this bill been in force, how greatly

would our innocent enjoyments have been curtailed! I have referred to a period of near forty years ago ; thousands of young people need similar relaxation ; and I will be no party to interfere with, or take away their necessary recreation; which I feel convinced would be the case if this bill passes."

Mr. ROEBUCK spoke forcibly in opposition to the bill.

There appeared throughout this bill a spirit of dictation which made him its inveterate opponent. At every stage of its progress, he would endeavour to de- feat it, and would divide the }louse on every clause. If it went into a Commit- tee, he would meet it with a proposal to put down every gentleman's private carriage. ( Cheers.) He would include in his motion another proposal, to bring under the provisions of the bill every servant going out of doors on busi- ness fin his master. (Laughter, and cheers.) If the going determined to read the bill a second time, he would try the courage of the House with this amendment ; and the House would not be acting consistently with its then de- clared principles, if his amendment were rejected. He repeated, that he would try the strength and courage of the House. Ile thought he saw some slit inking on the part of those around him ; thought he knew that, in feeling, they went entirely along with him. ( Cheers.)

Mr. O'CoNNEiL made a powerful speech.

The completion of such a bill as this would be the triumph of a principle of the most atrocious character—the triumph of a principle of most unchristian ten- dency ; inasmuch as it was a denial of the great principles of the Christian religion, as laid down by God himself. ( Cheers, with low cries of" Oh, oh !") Yes, yes, it was ; it was a bold and daring denial—it was an impious denial of the first principles of Christianity, inasmuch as it preferred the rich to the peor. ( Great cheering.) If they wished to carry such principles as these—if they wished to put such a bill as this into operation—why not commence in the pro- per quarter? Why not do away with the dining parties of the great?—why not compel the wealthy to pay a more marked reverence to the obligations of the Sabbath?—why not debar the proud aristocrat from compelling his menial to curry his horse, or his cook to serve up his turtle or his venison? Why not do away with the worst species of slavery—worse than all, because domestic—the slavery of menials and servants? Why not prohibit their Cabinet Councils, and their Cabinet dinners? Why not be manly enough to enact at mice, that no rick Dian should dare to do what the poor WA was afraid to venture on? why not do away with the Sunday drive in the Regent's Park? why not shut up Hyde Park ? why not do away with the loitering in Rotten Row, or say that there should be no carriage-drive iu the Circle, as there should be no cab in the street ? Why not do this? and then he would give Sir Andrew credit, which he did not now, for sincerity, as the people would give him credit fur a manly and straightforward determination to act justly by all. ( Continued cheers.)

The second reading of the Sabbath Observance Bill for Scotland was postponed to the 14th May.

On Thursday, at the morning sitting, Mr. BAINES gave notice of his intention to introduce (luring the present session a bill for the better observance of the Sabbath in England, founded upon the five first clauses of Sir A. Agnew's measure, and leaving out the objectionable clauses. At the evening sitting, Mr. HESKETH FLEETWOOD gave notice that he also should move, on Monday next, for leave to bring in a bill for promoting the better observance of the Sabbath.

Wanwice BOROUGH BILL.

In the House of Peers, on Monday, the Earl of DURHAM having moved the second reading of this bill, Lord WYNEORD said that lie in- tended to move an amendment, that the petitioners against it be heard by counsel at the bar ; but would not give his reasons for the motion, unless it was Lord Durham's intention to oppose it.

Lord DURHAM said, that he considered the proposed inquiry alto- gether unnecessary ; and was prepared to state why he thought so in reply to the arguments which Lord 1Vynford might use in favour of his motion.

Lord WvNroan then addressed the House in favour of further in. quirt'. There was no case of the kind in which the House of Peers bad not heard evidence at the bar. Though a legislative measure, the present also partook of the nature of a judicial inquiry. He asked for some precedent for the course which Lord Durham wished to adopt. The report of the House of Commons stated, that gross bribery pre- vailed at Warwick ; but it appeared that, out of a constituency of 1:300, twenty individuals only were accused of corruption. Then the evidence was not given upon oath in the second Committee, though it was in the first. He referred to the late trials at Warwick, at which the case against Mr. Tibbetts, the Town-clerk, broke down. In fact, out of the twenty cases, three only were prosecuted, the accusing parties not daring to go into court with the others. After suggesting that many of the petitioners for the bill might be actuated by personal feel- ings in their wish to swamp the Warwick constituency, he declared his conviction that this was by no means a case in which it would he proper to depart from the established mode of proceeding ; and therefore he should move, that on the second reading, the petitioners against the hill be heard by themselves, their counsel, or agents.

Lord Dr imam replied, that assuming Lord 1Vynford's statements to be correct, he was at a loss to know why they bad nut been proved be- fore the Committee of the Commons. This was the first bill of the kind which had been brought before the House since the Reform Act ; but within two years they bad abundance of precedents for disfranchis- ing boroughs. The notoriety of the case was then thought sufficient. Be referred to the Reform Act, and the disfranchisement of the forty- shilling freeholders. Where was Lord Wynford and his loud cries for justice in the bitter case ?

The parties accused had not brought forward a single witness to exculpate them from Ow charges contained in the report. He called upon their Lordships to consider the parties with whom they were going to enter into conflict, and those with whom they were going to enter into alliance. Who were the sup- porters of the hill? The House of Continuos. Who were its mmonents? That part of the constituency of Warwick which had been convicted of fraud, bribery, and • application of money to all sorts of unconstitutional purposes. Surely those were not the allies with whom their Lordships would embark in a contest against the House of Commons. One word as to the recent trials at War- wick, to which boil Wynford had alluded. From whom he had received his information he knew not ; but Lord Wynford had said that out of twenty ac- tions which had been brought against electors of Warwick for bribery, vet diets had been given onlv upon three ; thereby leaving us to suppose that all those actions had been brought by the same party. Now, there had only been four actions brought by the petitioners for the bill. On the night preceding the trial, the parties who brought the action against Mr. Tibbetts had abandoned it, on account of the consequences in which it must have involvvl him as a soli • citor. In the other three cases, the actions had been discontinued, as the object of the plaintiffs had not been the money, but the disqualification of the defen- dants-. With the other sixteen actions to which Lord Wynford had referred, the parties supporting the bill had nothing whatever to do. They were sham actions, brought by the chief agent of Sir C. Greville against his own parti- sans, for the mere purpose of preventing any other party from bringing them. These were facts; and at a proper season he would, if it were necessary, prove them to be so, from the declarations which had been filed in each of these actions respectively. Durham then detailed the proceedings of the House of Com- mons respecting this bill ; and declared that be should consider it a much more manly course in the opponents of the measure to throw it out at once, than to attempt its defeat by procrastination. Ile knew that it was in the power of the noble lords on the other side of the House so to Ileft:ar It. " We know that on any question dear to the People of England," said Lord Durham, "they have the power, if they so please, to throw it out. Let them be merciful, as we know that they are strong. Let them, nevertheless, not lightly embark in a contest with the House of Commons; for it is impossible that the Reformed House of Commons should retreat from any measure which it deems essential to the purification of its own body. Its honour, its character, and its reputation are at stake. It has pledged itself to inquire into and remove all abuses in its own constitution. There has been no denial of justice,—nor any thing like a deuial of justice, in the other House of Parliament ; and yet on this measure of purification, your Lordships are called upon to meet that House with a distinct and positive denial. The-noble and learned lord has told you that you must not let the House go down in public estimation. Now if I were an enemy to your Lordships' House, I should say that the downward road for your Lordships was the course now proposed by the noble and learned lord,--namely, that of placing yourselves in opposition to this bill."

If the opinion of the House were against him, be should not press the question to a division ; but would do his best to render the inquiry effectual.

After a few remarks from Lords WINCHILSEA, SALISBURY, CLAN-. RICARDE, and WESTMEATH, the amendment of Lord WYNFORD was agreed to, without a division.

Some conversation ensued respecting the best mode of proceeding. Counsel were called in; and finally, Mr. Harrison, Mr. Sergeant

Heath, and Mr. Whitcomb, were named by Lord DURHAM Its counsel for the bill ; Air. Sergetuit Alereweather appearing for the petitioners against it. Lord Durham gave in a list of witnesses whom he intended to examine ; and half-past three on the ensuing Friday was named as the time for proceeding with the inquiry.

The witnesses, however, were not called on yesterday till a later • hour. Mr. Greenway the banker, Mr. Brown, Lord Warwick's steward, Mr. Tibbetts, the Town-Clerk, and another person, were then ex- amined; and at half-past nine the proceedings were adjourned to six o'clock on Tuesday evening.

4. LIVERPOOL FREEMEN DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.

The Earl of RADNOR moved the second reading of this bill on Thursday; and stated that it was his intention to adopt the same course as the House had determined upon relative to the Warwick Borough Bill,—namely, to move that counsel be called in and witnesses examined at the bar in support of it. The Earl of ELDON opposed the bill.

There ntbdat be examples, there might be precedents for such a hill; but he knew of none.and God forbid that any one could be quoted ; for this was a bill that actually enacted that all future freemen in Liverpool, those who were not yet horn. should be disfranchised. He did not believe that such a bill as that had ever before been brought before Parliament. lle recollected Mr. Fox saying once, in a ease somewhat similar to this. that be could not make up his mind to disfranchise the innocent with the guilty- If their Lordships should adopt this system of legislation, they might depend upon it that it would lead to a change in the constitution of this eouutry. Ile was au old man, too fond perhaps of the institutions of his country ; but he did trust nevertheless that their Lordships would not disregard his advice on such a subject. A discussion then ensued respecting the period to which the inquiry should extend. Lord WHARNt7LIFFE wished to limit it to the election that had occurred since the passing of the Reform Act ; but Lotd WYNEORD would not allow that the Reform Act should be held to be a statute of limitations against all proceedings for corruption, and ob- jected to fribble away the inquiry in the manner proposed. The Earl of RADNOR remarked, that a bill similar to that which he brought for- ward had proceeeded pari passe in the House of Commons with the Reform Act; which was never supposed to be a full remedy for the corrupt state of things in Liverpool. Lord BROUGHAM and the Duke of IltelimoNo made a few remarks ; and it was finally resolved, that the inquiry should be limited, in the ,first instance, to the circumstances of the last clection,—with the understanding that even if 110 corrupt practices were proved to have taken place at that time, the inquiry might be extended to former elections.

5. Orricim. SEATS IN PARLIAMENT.

Sir ROBERT 1.11:itoN moved, on Thursday, in the House of Com- mons, for leave to bring in a bill " to prevent the necessity of Members accepting certain offices vacating their seats." Previous to the passing of the Reform Act, no Member would have con- ceived the idea of depriving the people of any share of influence in checking the prerogative of the Crown in the appointment of its Ministers; but now that the House was reformed, aunt that it would be utterly impossible for any Administration to retain office for any length of time if opposed to the general feeling of the country, it did appear to him that the existing system was unnecessary, Moan- yenient, and embarrassing He proposed to enact, in the bill which he moved for leave to bring in, that the following members of the Govern- ment should not vacate their seats on the acceptance of office.

Lords of the Treasury, Lords of the Admiralty. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secre- tary of State, Secretary at War, President of the Boaul of Control, President of the Board of Trade, Secretary to the AtIntiralty. Mastera;eiteral of the Ordnance. Clerk, Surveyor-General, or Storekeeper of the Ordnance, Pa>„.aster of the Forces, Attorney- General (Laughter and cheers), Sul icitor-t mien I, Chief Secretary to the I .ord- Lhnt- tenant of Ireland, Attorney-General for Ireland. Solicitor Geueral fir Ireland. Lord- Advocate of Scotland, and Military Secretary to the 17ommatoler-iu-Chief. There were two offices which, for obvious reasons, he did not desire to see altered. namely. the Stewardship of the Chiltern hundreds and the Hundred of East limited. Neither did lie propose that the bill should come into planatiou until after the next general elect ion.

Mr. E. Bermsat expressed his dissatisfaction with the measure of Sir B. Heron. The evils of time present system were these,—inconvenience to the public in the loss of able men ; a probable undue preponderance in the Cabinet of the agricultural interest; a subjection to the wishes of pecu- liar constituencies, rather than an impartial view of the general interests of the country at large, which if a great fault ill an ordinary Member, was a still greater one in a Minister ; and the great temptation afforded to corruption. The remedy proposed by Sir Robert Heron would only inert part of these evils : he meant to propose one which should re- move them all. He would not include in his measure all the Dii minores of the :Ministerial Pantheon. Ile did not consider that the public business was much interrupted if a Lord of the Admiralty or the Treasury suddenly left an aching void on the opposite benches.

The measure lie would propose should include one organ in that house of each at the principal departments of State. whether Secretary or Under-Secretary. President or Vide-President (because the heads of the office might perhaps be in the House of Lords) — such as the Home Department, the War-olliee, the Foreigmolliee, the Admiralty, the Colonies, the India Board, and the Board of Trade, to which he thought should he addi.:d the office of Secretary for Ireland ; and as the presence of one Law-officer in that House was expedient, he thought it wisdom as well as charity to include either the Attorney .General ur Solicitor-General. In his motion, he should not however define the offi,...s. but make merely a general proposition; the number of offices was a detail, and not a principle, of the measure.

He would not, of course, give Ministers not elected by the People the right of voting possessed by their actual Representatives. He left the Minister that which be was, a Minister of State, explaining his views, answering questions, and giving advice on matters of legislation and finance. It might be said, that popular principles would always in- sure the return of a Minister.

11.it many constitnencies would reject him for his very regard to the three !mot popu- lar ries of the day—,cheap law, cheap knowledge, and cheap bread. Let a people be ever so enlightened, there were always in the world bright :11111 luminous minds. that cast their shadows far beyond the popular sight. The science of statesmanship was indeed a mockery and deltisiott, if there acre nut some of its professors who went ba- you the multitude in the great principles of legislation, and offended the vulgar opinion by the very energy and providence of their views.

itilr. Bulwer concluded by moving an amendment, that "for the con- venience of the public service, and the promotion of the public interests, it is desirable that one organ of the most influential departments should have a seat in this House, in virtue of his office, but without the privi- lege of voting, unless returned to Parliament by the suffrages of a con.- stitueney.” Mr. WARD thought Mr. Bulwer's speech incomprehensible ; be could not enter into his refinements. He was strongly opposed both to the original motion said tit aim Monett ; beirevieg as he did, that either must weaken the t oeeeeting link tlhieh bound the people to their Representatives and raise an irresponsible power in the House.

Pr. LESHINGTON said that Air. Bulwer had made a speech worthy of the highest Tory in the worst Tory times. Because the King chose to appoint an individual to office, it did not inllow, it should not follow, that the People should therefore be compelled to bestow their confi- dence upon him.

Lord ALTHOItP began by stating, that the present motion was made without any communication with Ministers. There were two ques- tions befOre the I-louse ; and it had been said that if either were agreed to, the constitution of the country would he inOinoed upon ; but he

did not think so.

The act which gave a constitnen1 the tiglit of expressing their o;didon on their Re- presentative's acceptation of ofliee u:ttl...e ho Crown, contCrred, :t very valu- able privilege upon the People, :toil inn, a Molt they (meld not to be deprived of except for very strong aud peculiar eiream ; but lie did not think that the deprivation Would amount to any violation of con4iiiii iouat priuciples.

He admitted that, in the instance of the Attorney-General, the loss of his scat was a great iuconecnienee ; but he did not think the ab- sence of a junior Lord of the Admiralty a matter of much moment.

Hr v.as one of those 1%61 had changed his opinion On this ',Oita or Members of the Govt.:mm.1n having seats in the !louse. There wag a time when he was of opinion that Stumhers ot the Got cromeut should be excluded from the I louse altogether: he had changed his opinion-ri.ougreoatinued shouts of laughtcrj -but this eliatigo of opinion ,ens not it:dove:I by his aceessioo to (alive; for he hall altered his (.:titi on the subj, et before he beraitie a member of the Government. (1,auglab.r eosliuw i. l llonourable 14,11thVIN st"..111tal to lough: be could assure them odice wits no su •11 bed or -ha should out be over-vexed at the occurrence of ant- incident which rel.:Sere:1 it necessary for hits to go out of office.

His principal objection to the motion and the amendment was, their tendency to lessen the actual, moral, positive responsibility of a Minis- ter; for to send Ministers to the House with the privilege of speaking but not of voting, would be to place them in a degrading and nnpleasant situation. Besides, at present, the inconvenience was by no means so great as to call for any alteration of the existing practice.

Sir R. Helton made a few observations, and withdrew his (notion; and ?Jr. Beewfat withdrew his tunendment.

6. Tneoes Uenoxs.

A conversation arose in the House of Lords on Monday, on the subject of Trades Unions. The Duke of Newees-ree asked if any steps had been taken to prevent the processions, which had lately ap- peared on the Sabbath under the pretence of attending funerals. Lord Minaiounse said that he hoped such proceedings would die away if they were not interfered with; but Government was on its guard against riotous assemblages.

Lord Lontionotautv considered the present crisis a very alarming one. During the last few days, he understoed, that 13,000 members of the Unions had been enrolled.

Lord ELDON was decidedly of opinion that all such large assemblies were illegal.

If individuals were aggrieved, they had a right to carry their complaints to the King in Council ; they had also both Houses of Parliament to apply for redress. That was legal and constitutional. But if any set or class of men as- sembled together and declared, as the result of their deliberations, that they would ird obey the law (as had been done more than once recently ), that he would

maintain, was in the highest degree unconstitutional aml if what be had known to occur within the last few days wets: admitted to pass as a le!Tal act, then he would say, either that Ile did not understand the law, or, if he had forum ly understood it, that the law was now wonderfully changed.

Lord BaonellaM quite concurred with Lord Eldon in tiaiitl:ing vast and unnecessary assemblies of unit illegal. But the Minister was pha-cd in a difficult situation as regarded the means to be taken for preventing

them.

lie bad always to ask himself this question—he had always thus to reason- " It being the undeniable and sacred privilege of the King's subjects to assemble and meet together for the consideration of their own interests, fur the conside- ration of what they might deem grievances,—it being their undeniable and sacred right to assemble for these purposes,—it is for me, after due deliberation, to decide how far, in any particular instance, they have passed the proper point—how far they had departed from a rightful and adopted a wrongful prin- ciple." As a general principle, it was manifestly wrong to draw to „ether a large assemblage of people—to form an immense procession—for the mere pur- pose of doing that which six people could execute just as effectually as 60,000.

Lord Brougham trusted the members of the Trades Unions would listen to wholesome advice, given by those who had always been the friends of the humbler classes ; and that they would no longer be de- luded by treacherous and selfish leaders.

It was because he was the sincere friend of the working classes of the country- that he was an enemy to Trades Unions; and lie would add, that of all the worst things and of all the most pernicious devices that could be imagined for the injury of the interests of the working classes, as well as the interests of the country at large, nothing was half so bad as the existence of those Tneks Unions.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was of opinion that forcible means should be adopted to put down those sham funeral processions.

Here the conversation dropped in the Lords. In the House of Com- mons the same subject was discussed. Mr. HUMS:, in presenting a petition signed by many thousands from Newcastle, in favour of a mi- tigation of the punishment of the Dorchester Unionists, on the ground that they were ignorant of the law under which they were convicted, complained that the Government had shown great weakness in carry- ing so hastily into execution a sentence, which many lawyers considered illegal, and which was certainly harsh and severe.

Mr. WARBURTON, Mr. AGLIONRY, Sir S. WHALLEY, Sir G. STRICK- LAND, Mr. F. O'CoNNoa, Mr. O'CONNELL, and Mr. Hue., concurred in thinking the sentence much too severe. Colonel EVANS thought the sentence too severe; but still it was legal. He disapproved of much of the conduct of the Trades Unions.

He, fur instance, disapproved of their having marched in procession through the Metropolis the other day to present their petition ; though at the same time that he objected to the prudence of that measure, he must give them the fullest credit far their orderly conduct. He was one of those who thought the trades haul a right to put their own fair value On their labours, but to go beyond that would be only to injure themselves. The Trades Unions were, lie believed, the result of taxation on consumption, and cur present system of Corn-laws. He was sorry to Mid so large a portion of the peaceable and well-disposed workmen under the influence of agitators—for there were agitators of all classes—wIra he was sure would do them no good, but might do them much Lam. Mr. E. L. L't•t.wiu concurred with Colonel Evans. Sir C. Bea- RELL denie 1 that the agriculturists or landed gentlemen had formed similar associations. Mr. HARDY considered the combinations most dangerous to society. Mr. Gooson defended the conduct of Baron Williams; which, he said, had been perfectly legal and correct. Sir HENRY ilanntxor. strongly reprobated the Unions. His tailor Lad requested him not to press for a coat which he had ordered, as his journeymen had struck. Sir Henry told him, that rather than such abominable tyranny should be submitted to, he would go out in his shirt. Several other petitions in favour of the Dorchester Unionists were presented, and the discussion was closed.

7. BOARD OF CONTROL ; CONDI:TT OF Mn. CHARLES GRANT.

On Thursday, Lord ELLENBOROUGH asked Lord Brougham whether the proceedings upon the mandamus against the East India Company had been withdrawn in consequence of information received since the mandamus was applied for, or before?

Lord BROUGHANI said that the affair was in an incomplete state, and the questions could not be answered at present. In a fortnight or three weeks' time, he should be prepared to answer them. If Lord Ellen- borough persisted in bringing forward the motion, of which lie had given notice, on Monday, it would lead to observations on the conduct of Mr. Charles Grant at a time when his fliends could Dot possibly be prepared to meet them.

Lord ELLENBOP.00CII wanted a plain answer to his plain question. He should move that the Lords be summoned for Monday.

Lord Bnoutorast would not be drawn into a discussion of the case. Ile had state.' on his own responsibility, that the President of the II /on! of Control would not on Motolay be ready to enter on his tiamee, nor could has th•ft-la hint.cun,;isiently WWI what IIIVy owed to the paldic ; and vet the nol.le Damn was de. tettuined to foe it on in spite of ail. Ile would leave that to meanie

Lord ELLENHOB.OUGH said his conduct was before the House, and by them he would be judged. The question he had to put Led nut been answered, and never would.

Lord 11rorenam—,r Then time noble Baron is evidently well aware of that whieh he wishes the House to believe be is unacquainted with. It will, therefore, be superfluous for me to give him any of that iiifor. mation which he does not require."

Lord ELLEN BOROUGH denied that he knew ally thing of the neater. His reeson for ':aging that the question would never be answered, was that he had twice put it, and received none.

8. Miscmasaneous Sisereces.

Blue\,. it or OFFICIAL CONFIDENCE. Mr. H. GRATTAN, 011 Thurs- day, asked Lord Althorp a question as to the authentieity of a letter from the Marquis of Anglesey to Earl Grey, extracts them winch had

been read by Jr.a flume during the Repeal debate. Lord A:snorer admitted the authenticity of the letter, whieli laid been sch•ctisi out of it mass of correspondence. lie had at first stated that the Koss was Dot n genuine one. Ilis rolum ice beliovire: the letter was tad a :mnitille conuntini?atien ihat he could led' ill.: that No gl't S:t a hte.t,t1 Vtattith ore weld hart' I 'tt com-

mitted by oily pot,011 1.011tIoettNI t..11t11 brutal: oa t- ■i.tettiN-,

ho r,... :acct co .tty, hitt 4•'7-t.0 Vat: loll in %%hot tpx.,rter he was unalde : he 1,111.14ot:it ti.a-lare A to be a gro-s viol:it:on of attlitt1,11,70. IL-;cr. ho:;. )

The sabject was brought before the Peers last night, by the Mall of

Wier-nos tea ; who asked Earl Grey, if it were true thaw a :s- ewn:needing the destruction of tic Protestant Estnbli.d:;,u':. :e-

litnd had been written to him by the Marquis of Ansis , Ginn: denied that such was the tendency of the letter; het • in eel that the pass: eon read by Air. flume were substantially eel sect lie

Mt:meted that the breach of confidence by which the conteres of the letter had Leen made public must have Leen committed in Irelsed. Eine-es-los Ix Iiteresxo. A 'notion brought forward by Alr.

011 Thou:-day, to inquire into the means of forming an extended plan of education for Ireland, was withdrawn, after a brief discussion. Very few Irish Members were present ; and their absence was attributed by Mr. Barron to his refusal to vote for the factious motion for repeal.

TITHES IN IRELAND BILL. Mr. LITTLETON moved the second reading of this bill last night. A very long but extremely unin- teresting debate ensued; in which many Irish Members, including Mr. O'FERRALL, Mr. CAREW, Lord Lnernist, Mr. H. GRATTAN, Mr. Slime Mr. O'Coxxoa, Colonel CONOLLY, Colonel Peetenvae, Mr. 1). Bitowet, Mr. LAMBERT, and Mr. lireioteit, took part. With the exception ofColonelCosomet, all these gentlemen expressed deter- mined opposition to the measure—Colonel PERCEVAL because it was injurious to the Church ; the others, because it bore hard upon the landlords, and by rendering them virtually tithe-collectors, exposed them to the hatred of their tenants, and to the chance of losing their rents in tan. It was also asserted, that the previous Commutation Bill had in many places raised the amount of the tithe very considerably, and in others caused tithe to be paid where for three hundred years it had not been demanded. Mr. HENRY GRATTAN said that this was the case with some of his property, and that the bill would tax him to the amount of three or four hundred a year. Colonel Davis also opposed the bill in strong language. On the other hand, Air. LITTLE- TON, Mr. STANLEY, and Mr. WARD, supported the bill ; the last-named gentleman on the ground that it was right to ascertain whether the tithe fund could not be preserved with a view to its future appropriation for national uses. Mr. STANLEY said that the Irish landlords were willing to take the bill in those parts only which did not interfere with their interests ; butt it was the duty of Government to prevent the tithe fund from being extinguished. lie also remarked that the arguments pro- duced during the evening were merely scraps from the former debate.

Mr. CAREW moved that the discussion be adjourned to next Friday, in order to give further time for the consideration of the measure. This motion was rejected, by 241 to 74; and the debate was adjourned to Tuesday next ; Mr. O'CONNELL declaring that he should oppose every clause.

larsu CHURCH TEMPORALITIES ACT. Some amendments were agreed to in Committee last night, on the motion of Mr. LITTLETON.

One refers to the abolition of the Vestry Cess, which, owing to tie: delay in passing the bill, came into operation a year later than was in- tended ; thus leaving the rates of 1833 to be paid by the people instead of the Conirnissioners. The amendment gives the act a retrospect:Ye operation, so as to prevent this inconvenience. Another lies reference to the mode of valuing the Bishops' leases, and to those cases especially where the Bishops had granted leases to themselves in trust, or to their re- lations on the payment of inadequate fines, which would not nIford the basis for malting an accurate calculation. After some remarks from the Irish Members, resolutions to this effect were agreed to, and are to be re- ported on Monday.

DUNGARVAN ELECTION. The Committee reported, on Monday, that the late election for Dungarvan was void ; that Mr. Ebenezer Jacob was not duly elected, and that neither the petition nor the oppo- sition to it were frivolous nor vexatious.

LEITH HARBOUR BILL. On Monday, the House, by a majority of 26 to 10, refused to go into Committee on this bill. It was sup- ported by Colonel LEITH HAT, and opposed by Mr. ABERCItOMBY.

REGISTRATION OF DEEDS. Mr. TOOKE, on Thursday, brought in a bill to establish a general registration of all deeds relating to real property in this country. It was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Wednesday next.

CASE. OF BARON DE BODE. On the motion of Mr. HILL, a Select Committee was appointed to inquire into the claims of the Baron de Bode for compensation out of the fund paid over by the French Go- vernment for the purpose of indemnifying British subjects for the loss of property unduly confiscated by the French authorities.

AMENDMENT OF THE BEER ACT. Leave was given, on Tuesday, to Sir E. KNATCHBULL to bring in a bill to amend this act. Lord 1101VICK assured the House that there was no design of returning to the old licensing system, and that the new bill bad reference merely to matters of police, and the prevention of disorder in beer-houses. The motion for leave was finally carried, by 100 to 15.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. On the motion of Lord EiltINGTON, the bill for the regulation of weights and measures thoughout the United Kingdom was read a second time, on Wednesday, and referred to a Select Committee.

MERCHANT SEAMEN REGISTRATION BILL. On the motion of Sir Jemes Gualleer, this bill was read a second time, on Tuesday.

climbing boys was read a second time on Wednesday, on the motion of robberies.

Mr. TOOKE. The deputation of the Trades Unions, by whom the petition was PORTUGAL. It was arranged on Tuesday, that the state of our rela- tions with Portugal, and the treatment of Sir John Campbell by the Portuguese Government, should be brought before the House of Peers on Monday next, by the Marquis of LONDONDERRY.

WESTMINSTER Feseives. A conversation arose last night on the subject of this festival; which the Duke of Nnwces-ree and the Bishop of Losame considered as a desecration of the Abbey : no place once solemnly devoted to the worship of God should afterwards be used fur any other purpose. The Earl of Mesmeseenv, the Duke of Ctr+r- tuatI.-tee, and Lord Buoconam, could see no harm in the festival, when a similar one had been countenanced by George the Third.